Posts Tagged ‘Bloomberg’

SALEM, Ore. (AP) — An Oregon bill expanding background checks to encompass nearly all gun sales in the state made it through the Legislature on Monday, overcoming obstacles that stymied two previous attempts to pass similar laws.

The measure now heads to Democratic Gov. Kate Brown, who has indicated support. Her signature would make Oregon the eighth state to require screening before firearms could be transferred between private, unrelated owners. No other states have passed such legislation this year, advocates said.

Oregon’s effort is the latest after the long-running debate over gun rights intensified following the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012. Last year, Washington state passed a ballot initiative requiring background checks on all gun sales and transfers, and Dan Gross, president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, said the group has the signatures for a similar ballot initiative in Nevada.

Supporters have tried twice before to expand background checks in Oregon, saying it closes a loophole that allows people to purchase firearms online without a review. Neither attempt made it past a Senate vote, but Democrats managed to increase their majorities in both chambers after last year’s election, partially because key candidates in the Senate were backed by billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s gun control group, Everytown for Gun Safety.

The bill that passed the state House on a 32-28 vote Monday requires background checks on most private sales and transfers, except those between close family members such as spouses or siblings. There are some exceptions, such as sharing a gun while hunting or handing over a firearm for use at a shooting range. Three Democrats joined all 25 Republicans in opposition.

Once the measure takes effect, private sales would need to happen in front of a licensed gun dealer who would run the check through Oregon State Police.

There is an exception for gun sellers and buyers who live more than 40 miles from each other. In that case, the seller could send the firearm to a dealer near the buyer, who would then run the check and hand over the gun to the buyer if they’re cleared.

The bill has borne intense opposition from gun rights supporters, and every legislative Republican has voted against it. Many cited law enforcement officials in their districts who said they wouldn’t enforce the law or that it would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce.

Senate Bill 941, worse than doing nothing, gives false hope, because it represents to people that felons are not going to get guns. And colleagues, I think we all know that’s not true. They are going to get them one way or another,” House Republican Leader Mike McLane said.

Others argued the bill would trample Second Amendment rights or would make criminals of gun owners who choose not to get a background check every time they hand over a gun to a friend or neighbor.

The seller of a gun would face a misdemeanor for a first offense, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,250 fine. A second offense would be a felony, with a potential sentence of up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Under current law, anyone purchasing a gun from a licensed dealer has to pass a background check to ensure the buyer isn’t prohibited from owning a gun because of convictions for felonies or violent behavior. Oregon goes further than federal law by also requiring background checks at gun shows under an initiative voters approved in 2000.

“This bill is not about stopping all gun violence in Oregon, and it’s not about taking guns of the hands of law-abiding citizens,” said Rep. Jennifer Williamson, a Portland Democrat. “It’s about keeping guns out of the hands of domestic abusers, those suffering from mental health crises, and convicted felons.”

Bloomberg and his minions just keep checking off states on their list one by one-Nevada’s next.

I’ve posted many times about this-as have a lot of others,apparently no one’s listening,because every state on Bloomberg’s list is going down one after the other-and he’s going to keep checking off states on his list because no one’s paying attention.

Maybe when he buys enough votes in Nevada-people will wake up.

Via David Codrea…

Far from protecting lives and property, "progressive" Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake interferes with the ability of people to protect their own while simultaneously guaranteeing the safety of violent looters, vandals, arsonists and rioters.
Far from protecting lives and property, “progressive” Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake interferes with the ability of people to protect their own while simultaneously guaranteeing the safety of violent looters, vandals, arsonists and rioters.
Photo by Andrew Burton/Getty Images

As Baltimore erupts in violence, and Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake promises a safe haven for destroyers (thwarted only by the occasional armed citizen protecting life and property where the police fear to tread), an inescapable observation strikes. High-profile shootings of black males continue to occur in cities where “progressive” Democrats run things. Yet in spite of that, they embrace “gun control,” that is, a system where police are the “only ones” trusted to keep and bear arms.

Mayor Rawlings-Blake has been a big supporter of Michael Bloomberg’s Mayors Against Illegal Guns. She’s also a proponent of imposing citizen disarmament edicts not just in Baltimore, but in urging Congress to make his Demanding Moms agenda the law of the land.

That being the case, it’s fair to question how such representatives continue to be elected. These are supposed to be the places where politicians who purport to care deeply about minorities and social justice call the shots and implement programs to alleviate the inequities. Of course, we saw the last such gun-grabbing Baltimore Mayor, Sheila Dixon, resign in disgrace after being convicted of helping herself to gift cards intended for the downtrodden. Hey, an anti-gun kleptocrat can’t get by on fur coats and “lavish trips” from favored developers alone.

The bottom line: Local governments over much of urban America are indistinguishable from corrupt Third World regimes. The hate runs highest in these bastions of “tolerance” with their monopolies of violence. And those in charge seemingly get there not so much by merit or success at leading people in the dream of freedom and meritorious prosperity, but for a much more shameful reason, as indicated by a makeshift plywood sign on a looted store.

“this is a black own store,” a person self-identified only as “Mike” wrote. “you shouldn’t have touch.”

Why should who owns a store make a difference? It wasn’t merchants of any color who killed anyone.

The fruits of “progressivism” are becoming increasingly more apparent and less deniable for all to see, including the way it has most betrayed those relying on its exploitive promises. But don’t expect that to be widely recognized by the people most affected.

None of us can foresee the future and predictions are always dicey things to make, but if I had to venture one, I’d say U.S. cities are in for an interesting summer. If that’s the case, we shouldn’t be surprised to see members of the productive sector, who in turn will soon come to understand the “authorities” are useless at providing protection, reapplying old lessons learned from when Korean merchants refused to stand by while their livelihoods went up in flames


Recent history shows why Congress had to rein in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) with the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act of 1986.

On Friday, Feb. 13, 2015—the eve of a three-day weekend, with members of Congress back in their home states—BATFE quietly announced its intention to ban the manufacture and importation of the M855 cartridge. The plan was to take the second-most common variety of ammunition for the most popular rifle in America, the AR-15, off the market.

Your National Rifle Association (NRA), ever vigilant, caught the move and immediately sounded the alarm. Staunch opposition from the public and the law enforcement community (which rejected the Obama administration’s fairy tale that this was all for them), along with stalwart leadership from U.S. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.), U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and U.S. House Commerce, Justice, Science Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman John Culberson (R-Texas), forced BATFE to back down—at least for now.  Were BATFE to formally adopt the Framework, it could jeopardize access not just to M855, but to almost all ammunition…

BATFE laid out its absurd case for the ban in its “Framework for Determining Whether Certain Projectiles are ‘Primarily Intended for Sporting Purposes’ Within the Meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(c).” I encourage everyone to carefully read the “Framework,” which we linked to in our online alerts on Were BATFE to formally adopt the Framework, it could jeopardize access not just to M855, but to almost all ammunition if any of the ongoing attempts to ban lead ammunition were also to succeed.

The law that BATFE cited as the basis of the Framework was added to the Gun Control Act of 1986. It prohibits the manufacture and importation of so-called “armor-piercing ammunition.” This includes “a projectile or projectile core which may be used in a handgun and which is constructed entirely … from one or a combination of tungsten alloys, steel, iron, brass, bronze, beryllium copper or depleted uranium.” The law was passed because several special-purpose handgun bullets made of hard metals had been developed for law enforcement use, and concern arose that some of them might fall into the hands of criminals.

The core of an M855 bullet is made of lead, rather than one of the hard metals listed in the law, but BATFE designated the bullet as “armor-piercing ammunition” because of its steel tip. At the time, this didn’t present a problem in practical terms. Congress had recognized that many rifle cartridges “may be used in a handgun” chambered in a rifle caliber, so it passed the law with an exemption for projectiles “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes.” From the outset, BATFE said that the exemption applied to M855. Problem solved—or so it seemed.

Three years later, however, BATFE began showing signs that, in hindsight, could have served as a warning that M855’s “sporting purposes” exemption might one day be in jeopardy.

In 1989, BATFE prohibited the importation of 43 makes and models of detachable-magazine semi-automatic rifles which, for many years previously, it had approved for importation as being “particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.”

Attempting to justify its politically motivated reinterpretation of the law during the media-driven “assault weapons” frenzy, BATFE ludicrously claimed that shooting sports based upon defensive firearm skills were not “sporting purposes.” Equally indefensibly, it also said that recreational target shooting, which it dismissed as “plinking,” was not a “sporting purpose,” but was instead a “pastime.” By that ridiculous standard, sandlot baseball, a popular version of “the nation’s pastime,” would also not be a “sport.”

Sports, BATFE insisted, consist only of hunting, skeet and trap, and “organized marksmanship competitions.” But even by this overly restrictive definition, BATFE’s rifle ban had no legitimate basis. Virtually all of the general-purpose, magazine-fed rifles that it banned were no different than the American-made Springfield M1A. At the time, this rifle predominated in the most “organized marksmanship competitions” in this country, the annual National Rifle Matches, conducted every summer by the NRA and today’s Civilian Marksmanship Program at Camp Perry, Ohio.

Having redefined “sports,” BATFE next turned its attention to redefining “sporting” firearms. The Gun Control Act had originally sought to prohibit the importation of ultra-compact, inexpensive handguns. In 1993, however, BATFE again reinterpreted “sporting purposes,” this time to ban the importation of large, expensive handguns like the Heckler & Koch SP89, which it had previously approved for importation. BATFE didn’t pick and choose which sports to consider “sporting” this time, but it ignored its own longstanding Handgun Factoring Criteria. Handguns like the SP89 had satisfied BATFE’s criteria for “sporting purposes” by having features like adjustable sights, a long barrel and a mechanical safety.

In 1994, BATFE reinterpreted “sporting purposes” yet again to ban the importation of 12-gauge shotguns it had previously approved for importation. Then, in 1998, it reinterpreted its 1989 reinterpretation of “sporting purposes” to ban the importation of semi-automatic rifles made expressly to comply with the agency’s 1989 ban.

Fast-forward to the present. The BATFE attempt to ban M855 ammunition features its most far-fetched reinterpretation of “sporting purposes” to date. First, instead of considering, as the law requires, whether a projectile is “primarily intended to be used for sporting purposes,” the Framework claims that what counts is the type of handgun in which the projectile can be used.  BATFE argues the new focus on handguns is necessary because AR-15-type handguns pose a “significant risk” to law enforcement officers.

Originally, the BATFE granted M855 a sporting purposes exemption because the ammunition can be used in rifles. Now, it says that a center-fire projectile is sporting only if the only handgun in which it can be used is a single-shot. When “a handgun’s objective design is not limited to primarily sporting purposes, such as handguns designed to be carried and concealed, it may be reasonably inferred that ammunition capable of use in such handguns is unlikely to be used primarily for sporting purposes.” I guess the BATFE never heard of either wadcutter .45 caliber rounds used for Bullseye Shooting (or the NRA’s Conventional Pistol) competitions or hunting projectiles designed for revolvers.

BATFE argues the new focus on handguns is necessary because AR-15-type handguns pose a “significant risk” to law enforcement officers. That argument fails for multiple reasons. First, the exemption should not be based upon the type of firearm in which a projectile could possibly be used, but upon how the manufacturer or importer of the projectile intends it to be primarily used. Otherwise, ammunition designed for rifles can be jeopardized the minute someone creates a handgun that can fire it.

Second, the FBI reports that no law enforcement officer has been killed with any handgun chambered in .223 Rem. or 5.56×45 mm NATO during at least the past 35 years, and BATFE’s Framework makes no claim this has ever happened.

Third, the manufacturer or importer of a projectile cannot possibly know what type of firearm someone might use to fire the projectile. Congress could not have intended to place manufacturers and importers at risk of prosecution because their products might be used in a way for which they were not intended.

BATFE’s latest politically motivated twisting of “sporting purposes” has President Barack Obama’s fingerprints all over it. Obama is still livid over the fact that in 2013, the Senate voted down Sen. Dianne Feinstein’s “assault weapons” bill on a bipartisan vote of 60-40. He claimed if Congress wouldn’t act, he would.

To carry out the administration’s goals, BATFE didn’t just reinterpret the law, it effectively rewrote it. Untold millions of M855-type cartridges and projectiles have been manufactured, imported, sold and used for sporting purposes over the years. Since the mid-1990s, AR-15s have accounted for the vast majority of rifles used in  center-fire rifle shooting sports, and M855 ammo accounts for between a quarter and a third of all .223 Rem./ 5.56 mm cartridges sold. Simple math tells you the overwhelming use of those rounds has been lawful.

After creating a furor, BATFE retreated from its attack on the AR-15. Gun owners who contacted their senators and representatives to request congressional action to thwart BATFE’s ban were a key factor in this about-face. Majorities in both the House and Senate signed letters in opposition to the ban.

Nevertheless, as long as BATFE enjoys the support of an administration willing to bend the law to its agenda, the threat will linger. And that brings us to 2016.

Next year, we will have the chance to steer America back on course. A pro-Second Amendment Congress and president can curb BATFE from thwarting the will of the American people. Where BATFE’s ever-changing misinterpretations of “sporting purposes” are concerned, that must include revising federal laws to ensure they respect the right of Americans to acquire firearms and ammunition for all legitimate purposes.

Let’s ensure BATFE’s bogus Framework is trumped by America’s Framework, the U.S. Constitution. For the future of our country, we can strive to do no less.

Via David Codrea-

An Uber driver with a concealed carry permit, something self-designated “common sense gun safety law” advocates fought tooth and nail, saved a crowd of people on a Chicago street after a criminal opened fire on them by shooting the assailant, The Chicago Tribune reported Monday. Per the Assistant State Attorney, no charges will be filed, because the driver acted lawfully “in the defense of himself and others.”

There are two problems with this story.

First, chief MILM Shannon Watts says this never happens. And second, Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy says if it does, he’s trained his men to kill you first and ask questions later.

Three problems, actually, when you consider all the smug antis, like CNN’s resident ignoramus James Alan Fox, who assure us firing at an assailant in a crowd situation will only make things worse, and what we really need is more citizen disarmament.

What’s evident is that the “gun safety advocates” would rather the driver had been unarmed and the people being fired upon undefended. That way, they would have been able to up their “gun violence” hysteria, plus they would have had fresh blood to dance in and exploit for more citizen disarmament edicts.

People are waking up to that and it’s not working, unless, of course, you’re a “progressive” who takes his talking points from garbage like a hit piece in The Atlantic by a totally unqualified critic, or desperate one-sided Mother Jones propaganda presented as objective journalism.

It has to be driving these people nuts that despite all of Michael Bloomberg’s money, all of the grandstanding politicians and all of the efforts by an overwhelmingly sympathetic media, people are recognizing the truth in increasing numbers. And that means they’re also recognizing the lies in the gun-grabber narrative about armed citizens.


Oregon: Radical Anti-Gun Bills on the Move in Salem

This bullshit is brought to you courtesy of Bloomberg and co. Oregon was the next state on their list-They’re trying to check ’em off one by one.

On Tuesday, April 14th, Senate Bill 941, which seeks to expand background checks to private transfers, is scheduled for a vote by the Senate.  Please continue contacting your state Senator and strongly urging him or her to OPPOSE SB 941.

As previously reported, SB 941 would require individuals to appear before a gun dealer to request a criminal background check prior to privately transferring a firearm. Transfers include, but are not limited to, sales, gifts, loans and leases. Failure to comply with this mandate could result in stiff penalties and possible loss of an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.

On Thursday, April 16th, the Senate Judiciary Committee will be holding a hearing and possible work session on Senate Bill 945.  Introduced by state Senator Elizabeth Steiner Hayward (D-17), SB 945 creates the crime of endangering a minor by allowing access to a firearm. This bill would essentially require a person to lock-up or render their firearms inoperable.  Failure to do so could result in stiff penalties, including a five year prohibition on firearm possession.

On Friday, April 17, both Senate Bill 525 and Senate Bill 913 are scheduled for a work session and a committee vote.

As previously reported, SB 525, introduced by state Senator Laurie Monnes Anderson (D-25), would expand the list of those prohibited from owning firearms.  NRA does not support any expansion of the prohibited persons categories as defined by federal law.

Under SB 913, the ivory regulation bill, the sale, offering for sale, possession with intent to sell or importation for purchase or sale of any ivory or ivory product would be prohibited.  Virtually any lawful item containing any amount of ivory, with very limited and narrow exceptions, would be rendered valueless as it would be an offense for you to sell it or for another person to buy it.

Please contact members of the Senate Judiciary Committee TODAY and politely urge them to OPPOSE SB 945, SB 525 and SB 913.

Senate Judiciary Committee Members:

Senator Ginny Burdick (D-18)
(503) 986-1718

Senator Sarah Gelser (D-8)
(503) 986-1708

Senator Jeff Kruse (R-1)
(503) 986-1701

Senator Floyd Prozanski (D-4)
(503) 986-1704

Senator Kim Thatcher (R-13)
(503) 986-1713

 Clare O'Connor  Forbes Staff

Bloomberg-Backed Gun Control Group Upping Ante To End Open Carry At Kroger

Everytown and Moms Demand Action’s latest ad follows their print campaign, pictured, showing what Kroger doesn’t allow in its stores (here, outside food) versus guns, which are allowed.

Back in August, billionaire-backed groups Everytown for Gun Safety and Moms Demand Action joined forces to pressure Kroger KR -1.45%, the country’s largest grocery chain, to change its position on the open carrying of firearms in its stores.

The two groups, bolstered by a $50 million philanthropic injection from Michael Bloomberg, focused their attention on Kroger following a spate of lobbying victories.

In the span of a few months, they’d watched Starbucks SBUX -0.44%, Target TGT +0.12%, Sonic, Chipotle, Chili's and Jack in the Box respond to their demands by asking shoppers to leave their guns at home.

The groups followed their tried and true formula, starting a petition and mobilizing their hundreds of thousands of supporters to use a dedicated hashtag, #GroceriesNotGuns, across social media.

Kroger (market cap: $37 billion) wouldn’t budge, however. That August, the Ohio-based 2,625-store grocery giant — the country’s second largest general retailer, behind Walmart — released a statement saying it would “follow state and local laws” on open carry.

The following month, Everytown and Moms Demand Action upped the ante against Kroger, launching the umbrella group’s first ever large-scale corporate campaign, with an advertising spend of six figures.

Its ad blitz aimed to contrast items banned from Kroger stores — like outside food and skateboards — with openly carried rifles, which are permitted.

Kroger remained unmoved by that campaign, as well as a rally held outside its corporate headquarters the following month to coincide with the chain’s annual meeting.

Everytown and Moms Demand Action isn’t giving up just yet. On Tuesday, the two groups launched their latest joint effort against the open carrying of guns in Kroger stores, releasing a video ad they’ll promote widely online called Not Allowed.

In the video, seen below, a man walks unhindered through supermarket aisles with a large firearm strapped to his back, while other shoppers are stopped for bringing in a dog or a water gun:

Everytown and Moms Demand Action have also launched a microsite where supporters can enter totals spent on groceries at Kroger competitors. They aim to prove to the retailer that inaction on the issue of open carry is resulting in lost sales.

A representative of the two groups made it clear they’ll carry on pressuring Kroger until the supermarket chain agrees to ask customers to forgo their guns while grocery shopping. Their expenditure on this campaign is just shy of the $1 million mark to date.

Kroger did not immediately respond to a request for comment. This post will be updated if they do.

threeper flag587db-zoomie_resistor2b22bshoot_move_communicate

For some of us, this cause is not a hobby.  It is not drum beating, or attention seeking.  It is not something we believe—it is something we are.  We could no more lay down and accept this tyranny than the blabbering sheep can rise to fight.  In the bottom of our souls, we know we were created for more than subjects in a kingdom, more than a commodity to be controlled and managed.  We were born free.

by | Apr 2, 2015 |

There are a hundred ways to speak of the fire that burns in the hearts of patriots in this nation. Those who are seeking those of like mind can see it, spreading like a wildfire across a parched forest. Those who do not understand it are afraid of it, for it signifies something they cannot grasp and do not have the intestinal fortitude to stomach.  Liberty for All (LFA III%), the hardcore patriot group in Washington State, may be the tip of the spear, but there are many others throughout this nation who have been in the trenches for decades.

There are those who dismiss us, who claim that standing the line is stupid or even dangerous.  They claim we are setting back the liberty movement, or that we don’t know what we’re doing.  We are crazy, we are arrogant, we are self-absorbed—or so the stories go. There are days it seems that there is no end to the accusations and the backbiting.  At times, I find myself attempting to defend that which needs no defending.  It is a difficult lesson to realize, but time spent defending this fight to those with no concept of its necessity is, quite simply, time wasted.

The truth is, I have seen the men and women who stand next to me.  I have looked in their eyes and seen their hearts.  They are not crazy, and they are not fools.  There is a kind of soul that already knows how this ends.  There is a kind of heart that sees the cost before it comes, and offers to pay it even still.  For some of us, this cause is not a hobby.  It is not drum beating, or attention seeking.  It is not something we believe—it is something we are.  We could no more lay down and accept this tyranny than the blabbering sheep can rise to fight.  In the bottom of our souls, we know we were created for more than subjects in a kingdom, more than a commodity to be controlled and managed.  We were born free.

We were born to fight.

The naysayers will always be there; the loyalists of our time will always seek to justify their inaction and even their blatant cowardice.  The fence sitters will always find a reason to stay settled where they are, constantly trying to figure out which side of the fence is more advantageous to be on at any given time.  Eventually, they too will be left without a place to sit.  Tyranny does not give special treatment to those who help its growth; soon enough even those who called for caution and denigrated us will have to recognize their own chains.

In the meantime, the patriots continue to stand.  We continue to push forward, to dare things not seen in this country in over 200 years.  We seek no glory, but we do demand liberty; its pursuit will not be stopped for anything.  For us, there is no other option.  Our Constitution unites us, and the truth that men are born to be free will bind us together in this fight, come what may.  We will stand with each other, and while every single day we pray that it never comes to violence, if it comes we will stand through that as well.  And if the sun rises on a day when we are asked to give our lives in the defense of this absolute truth, we will do so…without hesitation.

Even so, know this:  we will not go quietly.  We will not go easily.  We will go filthy and stained, with the blood of those whose appetite for our liberties pushed them past a line from which there is no coming back.  We will go with as many tyrants as we can take with us.

We will never shoot first; we will not cross the line into violence. Our creed does not make us monsters; it makes us defenders. But if we are pushed, we will fight, and we will fight until we are dead.  And in the wake of our deaths, others will rise and fight in our place, and eventually we will win.  Even in death, we will win, because death is always more desirable than slavery.


There are a hundred ways to say all of this; pretty words and glorious imagery that evoke emotions that most people have forgotten how to feel.  But when all is said and done, it can all be summed up in one rallying cry.  One basic concept that holds within it the promise to all tyrants that any attempt on our lives will result in the fight—and the end—of their own, for there will be no more free Ruby Ridge incidents, no more free Wacos, no more free bloodshed.  One simple statement that every patriot understands in the core of their very bones.

We will not comply.

We stand.


Resist-by any means necessary-no matter what…


Key point raised by one sheriff..

Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer responded the law will be impossible to enforce.

“I don’t have any idea how it’s going to be enforced. I will tell this committee I have no intention to enforce it,” Palmer said. “State law allows me to use discretion on misdemeanors and I plan to use it every step of the way,” he added.

My opinion follows story.

SALEM, Ore. (AP) – A heated debate over gun control in the Oregon Legislature on Wednesday drew relatives of people killed during an Oregon mall shooting, law enforcement officers and gun owners as Democratic lawmakers push a bill expanding background checks to cover private firearms sales.

The Senate Judiciary Committee heard two hours of public testimony on a proposal that would require gun buyers and sellers who aren’t related to appear in person before a licensed gun dealer who can run a background check through the Oregon State Police. Proponents say it would close a “loophole” that widened with the advent of Internet gun transactions.

“This bill will not take all the guns off the streets, it will not remove all the guns from the illegal buyers,” said Robert Yuille, whose wife Cindy was killed during a shooting at the Clackamas Town Center in December 2012 while she was Christmas shopping. “It will take some off. Hopefully it’ll take the one off that would have killed your wife or your daughter.”

Opponents said background checks are ineffective, difficult to enforce and disproportionally burden law abiding citizens. Dan Reid, a National Rifle Association representative, said most criminals acquire guns through ways that are already illegal, such as through theft and the black market. The gun used in the Clackamas shooting was stolen.

Keizer Republican Sen. Kim Thatcher asked how law enforcement officers would be able to police every private transaction, and Grant County Sheriff Glenn Palmer responded the law will be impossible to enforce.

“I don’t have any idea how it’s going to be enforced. I will tell this committee I have no intention to enforce it,” Palmer said. “State law allows me to use discretion on misdemeanors and I plan to use it every step of the way,” he added.

The state’s background check requirement already goes further than federal law, requiring them at gun shows.

The seller of a gun would face a misdemeanor for a first offense, punishable by up to a year in jail and a $6,250 fine. A second offense would be a felony, with a potential sentence of up to 10 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.

Oregon law already prohibits giving a gun to minors, felons, people with recent convictions for violent behavior or those who have been found by court to have a mental illness.

Brady Campaign President Dan Gross said Oregon would be the sixth state since the Newtown school massacre to pass background checks on all gun sales.

Two previous attempts to require background checks for private sales have failed in the Oregon Legislature, but last year’s election saw Democrats increase their majority by two seats to 18-12 in the Senate. The wins were in part because of a push by a leading gun control group backed by billionaire Michael Bloomberg, which contributed $75,000 to Sen. Chuck Riley of Hillsboro, who defeated the Republican incumbent who opposed universal background checks.

The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote on the measure Thursday morning. If it passes, it could get a vote in the full Senate as soon as next week.

Bloomberg and co. are checking off states on their list one by one-this will be #6 if this bullshit is passed. There is no valid reason for this law,it will do exactly nothing to prevent “gun violence”-even county sheriff’s say it will be impossible to enforce-and at least one has testified that he has no plans of enforcing the law if it is passed. Gun owners in Oregon need to make it clear that they will not comply-if enough gun owners,in enough states simply refuse to comply-Blomberg et-al will stop trying to get similar garbage on state ballots-until they do stop,gun owners have to stand up speak out and fight back !    It’s  5-0.  Team Bloomberg/Shanon Watts and co 5,gun owners ZERO.                                                                                                                                                                 We must fight  back a lot harder than we have so far-the only state that has Patriots stepping up,and standing in opposition, no, defiance of this bullshit is Washington state-look to the gun owners of Washington state-to those few who stand every time this nonsense is in the news,or being voted on,or more such nonsense is being introduced-those who risked arrest,and even were arrested in one case-look  at what they are doing-follow their example…
They have the ‘nads to lead from the front-do you?
Resist,defy,stand in opposition,stand in defiance-tell those who would take the means to defend yourselves,your loved ones and your liberty from you that you will not bow down and submit to their draconian gun control schemes. The right to self-defense is a basic human right! The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in our Constitution,it is of such importance that the founders put it at #2 in the Bill of Rights.
Those who seek to take your right to keep and bear arms from you only seek power over you-they seek to control you and your loved ones.
They can not control an armed populace
The first thing every tyrant who rose to power in recent history did was disarm the citizenry,so that they were easier to control.
We must not allow that to happen here-we must not let those who seek power and control over us to disarm us-we must fight for our right to keep and bear arms-some of us may go to jail-that’s part of civil disobedience.
We need numbers,we need huge crowds at protests-if the stoned out of their gourds hippies and flower children could get large crowds in the 6o’s and 70’s…
then today’s 80-100 million gun owners should be able to have a huge turnout at every protest-every one-that’s what it takes-we need to have a huge crowd-a crowd bigger than the hippies had back when they were protesting the Vietnam war,we need crowds like there were during the height of the civil rights movement.
We need these huge crowds outside very statehouse in every state that Bloomberg and co. slime 
their way onto the ballot in. You know as well as I do that there are more gun owners than anti-gun zealots-lets start showing up-in force-at every event to protest any of this anti-gun asshattery.
Stand Up! Speak Out ! Fight Back !
Resist !
Defy !
Fight Back !
Do Not Submit !
Do Not Bow Down !

Reacting to the “catch and release” of one of its leaders for openly carrying a firearm on federal grounds that ban firearms inside the facility, Washington activists are planning a responsive armed demonstration, the Our State, Our Rights coalition announced today on Facebook. Liberty for All and Defend Amendment X will gather in front of the Tom Foley Federal Building in Spokane next Friday to protest the arrest and detention of Anthony Bosworth by DHS police on Wednesday.

“Bosworth … was arrested, detained for five hours in a steel cage without charges, denied Miranda rights, and access to an attorney, interrogated by the FBI as a domestic terrorist, and then released with a citation for ‘failure to comply,’ even though his civil rights were clearly violated at every turn,” the protest announcement explains. “His only action was that he was standing outside the federal courthouse at a 10th amendment rally, while legally openly carrying a firearm. The Feds have still not returned his firearms.”

Read the rest @

Via David Codrea…

Demonstrating once again that Everytown is a place seething with ignorance and prejudice, Shannon Watts of Moms Demand Action sent out a tweet Thursday every bit as insulting to young women as patron and patriarch Michael Bloomberg proved to be about minorities.

“You think your drunk college-age daughters are bad with their iPhones?” Watts asked, approvingly parroting the headline to an editorial in The Washington Post by an anti-gun psychiatrist. “Imagine them with guns.”

Read the WaPo article-it’s good for a few laughs anyways-the surprising thing is that supposedly “educated”people think like this…

The thing is, from her own narrative, the shrink admits she raised a scatterbrained girl. At least her daughter has learned enough to know mom will shield her from the consequences of her irresponsibility and buy her a new phone if she loses or destroys it because she’s oblivious or falling-down-stairs drunk. In any case, that’s hardly cause to project those failings onto all, and use the reality that some people abuse freedom to deny it to all.

Prejudiced citizen disarmament flack Watts joined an anti-gun headshrinker in painting all college women as drunken airheads, too irresponsible and incompetent to exercise their right to armed self-defense.

Sure, some college-aged people behave badly. And some behave well. Just like the rest of the world, isn’t it?

The antis twist that around, too. That way, if Chicago experiences a rising murder rate, why, that’s a perfect opportunity to rail about “concealed carry killers” or some other damned lie aimed at disarming people who aren’t the problem.

Funny, how college women are competent enough to drive “deadly” vehicles, to vote, to live on their own, to join the military, to get jobs, to form contracts, to get married, to “choose,” and to assume all kinds of adult responsibilities. Funny how “progressive feminists” (and talk about Opposite Day on steroids – or would that be estradiol?) rail against “inequality” and the like, yet when it comes to choosing the right to keep and bear arms, their default position is along the lines of “There, there, dearies, don’t you worry your pretty little heads about it.”

That’s hardly hyperbole. It’s the continuation of a gun-grabber tradition.

“Women are virgins when it comes to guns,” District of Columbia Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton, one of 25 women in Congress who sent a letter to the National Rifle Association protesting its then-new “Refuse to be a Victim” program was quoted in the January 1994 issue of Women & Guns magazine. “It should stay that way.”

Again we see stereotyping, and presuming to speak for all, because those who would control others know best. Right now it looks like there’s no shortage of people calling Watts on her shared WaPo prejudices over on her Twitter feed, and hopefully that post will stay up (if it doesn’t, I have a screenshot). At least that’s an improvement over her boss, who when he stepped in it and revealed his inner bigot, had the clout to order the video of it suppressed.